Andrus - 1

Richard Andrus

Film and Culture

Monday 5:30 PM

The Roles of Women as Seen Through the Lens of James Bond

Throughout the history of film few characters have been considered more manly, more

suave, more quintessentially cool than James Bond. Over the span of five decades, 24 movies,

and 6 actors portraying the character, James Bond has brought his debonair style and rapier wit

to millions of people. Every James Bond film comes with some key elements: the luxury car, the

nifty gadgets, the explosions, and most importantly: the Bond Girl. No James Bond film is

complete without a sexy, flirtatious foil for our dashing hero. Sadly, more often than not the

women involved in Bond films are often used as tools to maintain the status quo of gender

relations by showing that regardless of how much a woman has achieved on her own, when a

man shows up, hes the one in charge, and he fixes the problems.

Women involved in Bond films often start out strong and proficient, but when James

arrives on the scene they invariably melt to his charms and find themselves completely disarmed

of both their wits and their weapons and somehow immediately in dire need of his help. By

portraying women, especially women that have been proven to be both independent and capable,

as nothing more than a tool for James Bond to use like any one of his other gadgets, Bond films

disseminate the idea that women are incapable of helping themselves, or unable to accomplish

anything without the help of a man. They become another prop in the film, used to shine light on

the glory that is James Bond, while ensuring that the potential for a strong female character,
 Andrus - 2

capable of keeping up with our masculine front man is swallowed up in pithy one-liners and

explosions.

Women have been marginalized in film since its inception. We have seen the dominant

ideology establish what parts a woman was allowed to play, be it the house wife, the damsel in

distress, or the sultry seductress. These roles were created, and propagated to ensure that the

story that was told is the one that those in power wanted to be told. Nearly every female

character in any Bond film falls into one of those areas. Because of these and other roles which

women were forced into, The National Organization of Women was founded in 1966, shortly

after the release of the first James Bond film, Dr. No, in 1962. The N.O.W was perhaps the first

group to have a standing committee dedicated to improving mass media portrayal of women

through active education by discussion (Boersma 3). The National Organization of Women and

other groups like it strove to create equality for women in all mediums, including film,

recognizing the power contained in the media for determining the direction of the Gender

Equality movement.

One area of concern was the portrayal of women affecting those choosing to enter the

workforce. As stated: Even if women continue to enter the labor force to perform a variety of

tasks, it may be a long slow process before the image of women changes. The media images of

women are not only either negative or traditional: women are also so poorly represented in

decision-making situations that they will have little opportunity to modify the image of their own

sex (Boersma 4). This idea is explicitly shown in multiple Bond movies; a woman comes to a

moment of decision where her character might actually get to choose which course to follow, but

it is almost immediately taken away by Mr. Bond, because he, of course, knows exactly which

choice would be best for all parties involved.

 Andrus - 3

Another issue prominently featured but not widely seen is the fact that many women in

Bond films are demoted, or removed from a position of power. An example of this is Pussy

Galore, whose name could be a two word conclusion for this paper, who was an apt fighter,

capable pilot and trusted henchman to Auric Goldfinger. However upon the arrival of James

Bond she is relegated to a tool for him to use to defeat Mr. Goldfinger. Her expertise as a pilot

and strength as a body guard are completely enveloped and overridden by Bonds charm, and then

used as a means to his ends. Time and time again we see that any prominence, to which the

women with whom James Bond has interacted might have risen, is dashed once he enters their

sphere.

This is not to say that the writers of the Bond franchise have not made attempts to at least

feign an interest in overcoming the stereotypes that theyve taken upon themselves. With the

casting of Dame Judi Dench as M, the director of MI6 and James Bonds boss, there was a claim

that James Bond had overcome its roots of simply objectifying women, however, in the end Mr.

Bond saved her as well. It seems that no matter how noble the intention, writers are incapable of

having a female character stand her ground and succeed in doing so.

The nefarious effect of these and other types of films on the audience, both women and

men, is to imply, overtly or otherwise, that a womans purpose is singular: to prop up and sustain

the man in her life. A womans success is directly associated to the man whom she is with. As

one author put it, in many films Marriage was the be-all and end-all. Womens films divorced

themselves from timely plots and controversial subjects and became how-tos on catching and

keeping a man. Veneer. Appearance. Sex appeal. (Rosen 9). By showing that the women are

incapable of functioning at a higher level with a man like James Bond around, society is being
 Andrus - 4

taught that women need a man like James Bond around, so that they can fulfill their less lofty

goals, while ensuring that his goals and desires are fulfilled.

The fact of the matter is that despite the misogynistic view which James Bond and films

like it take, they make money. The Bond films were a tremendous financial success in a decade

in which the movie industry faced what we retrospectively call Hollywoods Sixties recession

(Moniot 25). And Bond films have done nothing but continue to make money since their

inception in the 60s, with the large majority of the films bringing in well over their budget. The

question becomes, does the franchise succeed in spite of the demeaning view that it takes on

women, or because of it. Sex sells. Those two simple words sum up an enormous part of the

reason that every Bond film at one point or another has a prominently featured yet scantily clad

woman. It puts butts in seats, and as long as it continues to do that it will continue to be a part of

the formula.

Bond films do more than just show women in perilous or sexual situations, they also lend

themselves to the basest of natures in men, that being the instinctual drive to have as many

potential sexual partners as possible. James Bond is a constant character, but the women he

associates with are one-and-done. They are a flash-bulb. By showing a single man having

multiple partners, not just within a singular film, but across a swath of films, studios are able to

appeal to the basic, subconscious desires that men are born to, thereby profiting off of their

desire to indulge their more animalistic selves, at the cost of the women on screen and off the

screen. While this is not intended to excuse the continuation of sexist ideal and inappropriate

portrayals of women, it shows how they can continue to exist, despite the fact that so many men

claim to feel otherwise.

 Andrus - 5

In an era where more and more each day a light is being shed on gender inequality, how

is it that films such as Die Another Day cant help but show their female lead, Halle Berry, an

Academy Award winning actress, bikini-clad, emerging from the ocean only to be later saved by

Mr. Bond? One author surmises it as such: Although much has been accomplished by now in

the name of gender equality, it is still true that in no region of the world are women and men

equal in legal, social, or economic rights. We believe that this is because the bulk of development

and human rights work toward gender inequality ignores the role of institutions (formal and

informal) that maintain womens unequal position (Rao 142) What this tells us is that while we

are seeing great strides being made in gender equality, those strides are being made in arenas that

are less impactful, e.g. social media, companies, etc. while the institutions that exist and are in

power remain impervious to the call for equality and are able to continue to spread their ideals

through any means possible.

It is important to differentiate between organizations and institutions: The terms

institution and organization are often used synonymously, but we find it useful to distinguish

between the two. We understand institutions as the rules for achieving social or economic ends.

They determine who gets what, who does what and who decides. (Rao 142) Many organizations

pride themselves on being forward-thinking and ahead of the curve when it comes to women

and their place in society. However, the issue is not with these organizations, it is with the

institutions of society itself. The ideals that a society has will inevitably be shown through many

different areas, including legislation, educational curriculum, and religious organizations.

However, the most pervasive and pernicious vehicle for the dissemination of these ideas is the

media.
 Andrus - 6

Through media like the James Bond franchise institutions are able to strengthen their

hold and ideology in a manner that is not as invasive or obvious as it might otherwise be. The

argument is often heard that men go to James Bond films because they want to be James Bond.

There is no malicious intent, they simply want to turn their brains off and pretend to be a badass

who has the cars, the money, and the women that they are missing in their lives, and that there is

nothing inherently wrong with that. The problem comes when you think about the subliminal

ideas that are being portrayed by these mediums, and whether or not one person is able to

differentiate between the real world and the silver screen does not necessarily mean that another

is equally as capable, or worse yet, an impressionable younger person.

The question then becomes: How do we change the institution? How do we do better?

Unfortunately there is no easy answer. These ideas are deep seated and jealously held by those

who most devoutly espouse them. As was seen with the most recent Ghostbusters film, people

dont like change, especially when you are changing something as obvious as gender. One can

only imagine what the uproar would be if a James Bond film was created where the role of Mr.

Bond was filled by a woman. That being said, through small and simple means repeatedly and

loudly enacted, we are able to make big changes, and the aforementioned less impactful ways

are truly the best way to start: through social media and other organizations.

By looking at the organizations in which we participate and seeking out the underlying

institutions that affect and shape them we can find ways to overcome the stereotypes created and

enforced by the James Bond franchise and films like it. This will not be easy because we are

challenging what has become a generational staple for many people. James Bond is something

that Grandfathers, Fathers, and Sons can interact around. Comparing the onscreen juggernaut

that Sean Connery so affably played with the understated confidence portrayed by Roger Moore,
 Andrus - 7

and the gritty realistic portrayal shown by Daniel Craig. However, the argument is not that the

construct needs to be destroyed, but simply augmented to allow for Grandmothers, Mothers, and

Daughters to participate in the conversation, without simply feeling like they are there as a

simple token participation. As we look at ourselves, and truly and honestly assess the media that

we take in, and compare it with the values that we claim, we can decide and change the

institutions that play such a large role in society.

 Andrus - 8

Works Cited

Boersma, Dee. A Report on The United Nations Commission on the Status of Women and Mass
Media. Journal of the University Film Association, vol. 26, no. 1/2, 1974, pp. 34.,

MONIOT, DREW. James Bond and America in the Sixties: An Investigation of the Formula Film in
Popular Culture. Journal of the University Film Association, vol. 28, no. 3, 1976, pp. 2533.,

Rosen, Marjorie. How The Movies Have Made Women Smaller Than Life. Journal of the University Film
Association, vol. 26, no. 1/2, 1974, pp. 610.,

Rao, Aruna, and David Kelleher. Institutions, Organisations and Gender Equality in an Era of
Globalisation. Gender and Development, vol. 11, no. 1, 2003, pp. 142149.,
www.jstor.org/stable/4030706.